Questions and answers

1. Um... it's just kinda worked out like that so far? This is all on me. There's no real fixed process as to our publication dates, other than maybe I feel a bit more pressure if there's a holiday or long weekend looming.
   
2. Yes, I'm seriously excited about all the items in the Lots and Lots of Additional Features section, but especially the last two bullet points. In terms of things being done differently, I think it'd be nice to get the Imperial Age out sooner rather than later, but I respect we still need to make adjustments to the Bronze Age mechanics first and that Hubworld will bring brand new mechanics into the game.
   

That's really not true, I'm always inclined to post on forums (it's my fave part of the job!), however doing so isn't always possible due to conflicting demands on my time during the work day.

As few as bloody possible.

realtimecollisiondetection.net/blog/?p=44


regarding doing an hour long video... I think that would be cool, but I think something periodic would be better. Short snippets. Snippets of wisdom, or tales from the trenches.

I'd love to do that.

I'm going to be blunt here for a change:

Why don't we tell you what features are coming next? Well, it's got something to do with how you make a great game vs expectation. Most of you don't believe in Godus as a great game, but we're still trying to follow the tenets of great game development, and one of those things is to kill your babies just like you do when writing.

If an ardent Potter fan was told they could get their hands on a full text version of book X with all the stuff that was written and thrown away put back in again, do you think they would even stop to think before handing over the cash for the "special edition"? I certainly don't think so, and I also think the book with the extra content is actually worth less than the one that was published. There's a reason why fiction writers spend more time writing than non-fiction writers, it's about culling and revisions, and realising that what you've written just doesn't work. I've written fiction, written games, and in both cases, I've lost chapters/features from them before release just because they just shouldn't be in there. The best game/book, is the one with all the good bits, and nothing can be taken away. (like Lord Ba'al 's signature decries)

Sometimes we implement a great big game feature, test it, make it work and play with it, even extend it, and then just cut out of the game. I remember Shigeru Miyamoto saying somewhere that you should "make the sequel" to any game idea. This fits nicely because last century, I got the feeling that developers didn't know how to cut the crap, and a sequel was the safe way to explain how to do just that.

And that's the problem we have as game developers if we announce what's in a game before we publish it. When you announce something, there is an expectation that it will happen, and it just makes everyone angrier when it doesn't happen, or worse, happens due to popular opinion, and then gets ripped out like it should have been from day one. I think that we try to ride a balance between announcing features, and concealing them, between keeping people in the loop, and not breaking hearts. Sometimes things get out, like settlements, and now some people are going to miss them, but the majority will prefer the new ones.

I don't think there is any way everyone will be happy with the amount of communication, but we can always try to be open about how we work, even if not what we are working on specifically.

And don't tell anyone about the up and coming dragons and knights stuff. I'd hate it if that bit got out.

While I can agree and understand that you need to try things out, test them and maybe throw them away, what we would like to have is to hear about this.

I appreciate that you don't want to have expectation for something just to throw it away, because that could cause bad press and have people be disappointed that it's not in the final game. However, we are already disappointed that we don't get to see any of this stuff. So long as you guys are very clear when you tell us about what you are doing or looking at implementing then overall you're going to get a boosted responce from the community. So for example, you can say "We are testing out having settlements with tank-tracks so you can move them about like giant mobile siege engines and fight each other with cannons attached to your settlement. We aren't sure this is going to be in the final game, but we're going to test it out", and then we know that's what you guys are working on, so we're happy. If you then announce later on that it didn't fit with the aesthetic of the game and felt out of place, then i'm sure some people will be sad, but they won't think worse of 22cans as a result.

Basically the trust issue that we have with 22cans at the moment has arisen from a lack of transparency about what you guys have been doing, not from lack of stuff being delivered. We can all understand if stuff takes a lot longer than expected because of XYZ, but if (as has happened in the past), we just seem to hear nothing for a few months, then it's natural we will be concerned about what is going on.

So long as it doesn't get in the way of the werezombiedinosharkswithlaserbeams i'm 100% behind your decision.

Also... I don't want to beat a dead horse here.. but I think your current/former PC fans are well aware that great features are often scrapped for a myriad of reasons during development. While there may be some disappointment among the community if you came forward and said "battle-tank riding dinosaur herders have been scrapped because xyz" I would suspect your more reasonable community members would be satisfied, and actually DEFEND you against the more trollish types. There are a few Steam Devs out there that are very open, and while there are disappointments from time to time, it's pretty obvious that they are "catching more flies with honey than vinegar."

.. because it's a religious movement backed by unblinking sheep who never criticise their education or their leaders...

I might be slightly biased. Also, I've watched it be the cause of games becoming "hard to modify" during development for over a decade.

I also run this : www.dataorienteddesign.com

Could you perhaps go a little deeper into why it makes games hard to modify? Aren't there design patterns that are supposed to do exactly the opposite of that?